CathInfo.com

What is this nonsense about Father Hewko being confused?

His criticism was very solid and extremely articulate.

Does the New Mass gives grace? Abp. Lefebvre said it is sterile and doesn't pass the grace. A sacrament is defined in the traditional catechism as "an external sign, instituted by Christ, that gives grace." This is presupposing the "sign" is a Catholic sign, and not tampered and modified to give a Protestant and Modernist expression. The New Mass expresses a sign that is no longer Catholic, but Modernist. This is because the New Mass incorporates some Catholic elements, some Protestant elements and some Modernist elements, all combined into one liturgical action. So, taken as a whole, the sign expressed in the New Mass is a Modernist sign, a Modernist Liturgy, one that no longer expressing the Catholic Faith!

Consequently, it can be debated at the theological level if this New Mass, expressing a non-Catholic sign, actually confers grace, even if it be valid at times. It appears Abp. Lefebvre never thought it did. Bp. Williamson holds that if it is valid then it automatically gives grace. Perhaps, one could argue that POTENTIALLY it could give grace (if it's valid), but ACTUALLY it doesn't, in many cases, because of the lack of dispositions necessary. This, because the priest and many attending the New Mass, have a non-Catholic understanding of the Mass, and if it's merely a "symbol of the faith of the community," as is taught by Modernists, then their lack of Faith and proper dispositions, blocks the transfer of grace in their souls. In this case, for many souls, the New Mass doesn't give grace.

As I said, perhaps there's room to debate at the theological level, but at the practical level, it is extremely dangerous for clergy to promote the erroneous opinion that "the New Mass gives grace" because uninformed souls will take this as a green light to attend it and put their Faith in grave danger! Even Abp. Lefebvre said that he believed the New Mass doesn't fulfill the Sunday obligation, precisely because it expresses a different Faith from Tradition. "Lex orandi, lex credendi," as the axiom from St. Vincent Lerins says, "as we pray, so we believe." If we pray as Catholics, we will believe as Catholics; if we pray as Protestants and Modernists, we will believe as Protestants and Modernists!

Can anyone explain what's actually wrong with this statement?  Father MacDonald's vague ad hominem attack about Father Hewko being "confused" and "probably tired".  OK, I knew Father MacDonald at seminary, and have heard his recent talks, and this is much more articulate and solid than anything Father MacDonald could ever produce, even if not the least bit tired and at the top of his game.

Father Hewko is spot on with this.

Johnson's theology has always been absurdly confused, and for Father MacDonald to defer to Sean for this defense demonstates that he's a theological lightweight ... as he was back at STAS.

Father Hewko clearly articulates that it's possible, from a theological standpoint, that a valid Sacrament could confer grace, but that the position is dangerous.  One could make the same case about the Orthodox Mass, that, hey, it's valid, so I can go there to receive the Sacramets and receive grace.  Why not, eh?

Bishop Williamson's answer, as Father Hewko rightly points out, will be taken by the faithful as a green light to assist at the NOM in the interests of receiving the graces of the Sacrament.

Father clearly makes the distinction that Johnson has always missed on this issue, namely, that while the Sacrament objectively has the "potential" to confer grace, whether it actually confers grace is dependent upon other factors, including the disposition of the recipient, and the context in which it is received.  That's precisely what Father Hewko is correctly articulating here.  In fact, various saints and theologians have also stated that the holiness and the dispositions of the priest can effect the degree to which the graces of the Mass are applied to the faithful.  If the Mass is offered in an irreverent manner, the degree to which God will confer grace upon the souls present would likely be greatly diminished.

OBJECTIVELY speaking, the amount of grace available from a single Holy Communion is infinite, and reception of Holy Communion could and should transform each recipient immediately into a saint.  But the gace that each recipient receives is "throttled" by extrinsic considerations, including the dispositions of the recipient, and even the reverence with which it the Mass (in which it was consecrated) has been offered, etc.  There's no reason that God, being displeased with the sacriledgeous Prot Rite, with the Catholic Offertory replaced by a тαℓмυdic blasphemy, a Mass that Our Lord calls odious and containing words from the abyss (cf. Julie Marie Jahenny), there's no reason that God could not throttle the graces received to zero.  If a Catholic were to receive Holy Communion in an Orthodox church, even if, say, done in good faith (let's say an ignorance Catholic thinks it's an Eastern Rite Catholic church), there's nothing to prevent God from not conferring grace to the soul from the Sacrament given in that context ... apart from perhaps what He might grant for the subjective dispositions alone, i.e. similar to what one might receive from a spriitual communion.